Turk Talk: Cover Two

Absolutely love it...the post, that is...I despise watching "my" Bears defense use the Tampa variation, it's extremely frustrating, and you're right about getting pressure on the QB, that's why "we" brought in Julius...my bday isn't til April, but I'll take this as my gift...thanks for the vid and insight!

Looks to me like the Cover 2 and Tampa 2 put a premium on linebackers. You'd have to have 3 very solid LBs to run that defense effectively.

I've heard announcers say the Tampa 2 devalues cornerbacks to a certain degree and now I see why. If they're spending a large amount of time covering short zones then they're basically just smaller linebackers.

Also seems like middle runs could do a lot of damage against the Tampa 2 unless your D-Line is very good. It feels like the Tampa 2 is a "front seven" based defense. Am I close?

*edit* oh yeah, I see the old logo is back. Very nice. Also, I want hat now. Gimme.

Looks to me like the Cover 2 and Tampa 2 put a premium on linebackers. You'd have to have 3 very solid LBs to run that defense effectively.

I've heard announcers say the Tampa 2 devalues cornerbacks to a certain degree and now I see why. If they're spending a large amount of time covering short zones then they're basically just smaller linebackers.

Also seems like middle runs could do a lot of damage against the Tampa 2 unless your D-Line is very good. It feels like the Tampa 2 is a "front seven" based defense. Am I close?

*edit* oh yeah, I see the old logo is back. Very nice. Also, I want hat now. Gimme.

Your right about the Tampa 2 defense needing a strong front seven. It also needs strong safety play. As I said in the video, it is used on long yardage downs quite a bit. What makes the Bears Tampa 2 so effective is Urlacher, He is 6'4, has long arms, and is very athletic, he gets to balls that a lot of MLB's don't.

You know, I think it is run in college, but I cannot remember seeing a lot of it in the NFL, but is there a variation out there right now that is really a 4-2-5 with an extra safety acting as the Mike backer? I would think that I could mitigate some athletics advantages an opponent would have.

I think that would be more of a defense on 2nd and 3rd and long situations. With so many 2WR sets and shotgun being used, can you see this happening soon?

With the Bears, I wish they would run more "Buster" plays and keep Tillman on the zone side of the field. I constantly get frustrated when I see so few attempts at press coverage. Obviously, they run the system well, but I would enjoy some variation when I see well-run dig routes beat our backers and the constant Packer slant that makes me throw up on Sunday. Even though the norm is pretty good, it still makes me wonder if it can be even better.

Turk,
I'm sure this has been discussed before but I'm kinda new here but are we seeing the demise of the Tampa Two? Everyone wants the 3-4 now. Is this a fad or the future?

Fewer teams are using the Tampa 2 coverage. It is used on longer yardage situations (when the threat of a run isn't as great) most of the time or in prevent situations. The 3-4 is making a comeback due to the success of the Steelers and the Patriots. The 3-4 was the primary defense I saw when I played, then defenses went to the 4-3 to try and stop the run game, everything is cyclical. With today's game being more pass oriented, we will continue to see the 3-4 defenses grow.

You know, I think it is run in college, but I cannot remember seeing a lot of it in the NFL, but is there a variation out there right now that is really a 4-2-5 with an extra safety acting as the Mike backer? I would think that I could mitigate some athletics advantages an opponent would have.

I think that would be more of a defense on 2nd and 3rd and long situations. With so many 2WR sets and shotgun being used, can you see this happening soon?

With the Bears, I wish they would run more "Buster" plays and keep Tillman on the zone side of the field. I constantly get frustrated when I see so few attempts at press coverage. Obviously, they run the system well, but I would enjoy some variation when I see well-run dig routes beat our backers and the constant Packer slant that makes me throw up on Sunday. Even though the norm is pretty good, it still makes me wonder if it can be even better.

I don't study a lot of college defenses, but it makes sense with all of the spread option offenses being run. The 4-2-5 is used in the NFL all the time, especially when the offense goes to its 3 WR sets. Indy will see teams run this defense against them so that they can put a DB on Dallas Clark.

When you say the corner has flat responsibility, you are saying the corner has zone coverage for passes in the flat, etc. Is that right?

This game must be fun to play. It's all dynamic spatial analysis.

Every single time I watch your videos, I regret not playing this in an organized manner as a kid.

Some players can't grasp their exact responsibility watching tape or seeing Turk diagram on a grease board. They have to be on the field and take reps in 3D. They are all about dynamic spatial analysis. Some are analytical and get the concepts on the board, but can't translate it to the field when facing live bullets. It's good to have both analytical AND dynamic spatial analysis. If you were allowed just one of the abilities, it's a no brainer....dynamic spatial analysis on the field of play.

I love the Buster-type coverage with a mix of man and zone largely because it can make a QB question himself. And if you're in his stadium, he's gonna hear about it when he falls prey to your plan. These are things which I think generally aid your pressure, and can give him a quick trigger, happy feet, or a brain cramp in the pocket. Looking foolish on the pick is worse for a QB than having a DB make a great play on the ball.

Having seen teams compete for championships with the Tampa-2, and also seen teams succeed in spite of their Tampa-2 or fail utterly, I have come to the belief that in order to run it extremely well, you need an All-Pro or similar at every other position. Two on the line, two in the LBs, one safety and one corner. Bonus to have two good safeties or multiple good linemen/LBs. The difficulty comes with the dropoff - it's a hideously precipitous dropoff if you have only one excellent D-Lineman, and even worse with only one really good LB (Buffalo under Dick Jauron, anyone? The difference between Perry Fewell with NYG players and Buffalo players, notwithstanding some philosophical burdens from above, is night and day - he's a good coach if let be and provided good players, which leads me to suspect that Jauron's preference for the passivity of the Tampa 2 was the philosophical root of the two-pronged problem). Average and good front 7 don't provide enough of a sustained late pass rush and will consistently fail against an offense applying pressure. Only way to succeed is to have one of the two or three best offenses in the league, and solid kicking teams.

And if I have misread Buffalo under Jauron as playing less Tampa-2 than not, oops, I apologize Mr. Jauron; I still blame him for the philosophy, though he didn't collect ALL of the inadequate talent.

I think I'm now done piling on Jauron (who does appear to be one of the most genuinely kind and thoughtful people west of the Pacific and that counts for a lot with me). Sorry 'bout that.

Very Cool as Always Turk including your hat. I like how the Tampa Two is ran by teams Dungy has his influence repped--Lovie in Chicago, his old teams the Colts & Bucs. I like these plays and wonder how it'll hold up with the teams using them today.